About Me

In writing the "About Me" portion of this blog I thought about the purpose of the blog - namely, preventing the growth of Socialism & stopping the Death Of Democracy in the American Republic & returning her to the "liberty to abundance" stage of our history. One word descriptions of people's philosophies or purposes are quite often inadequate. I feel that I am "liberal" meaning that I am broad minded, independent, generous, hospitable, & magnanimous. Under these terms "liberal" is a perfectly good word that has been corrupted over the years to mean the person is a left-winger or as Mark Levin more accurately wrote in his book "Liberty & Tyranny" a "statist" - someone looking for government or state control of society. I am certainly not that & have dedicated the blog to fighting this. I believe that I find what I am when I consider whether or not I am a "conservative" & specifically when I ask what is it that I am trying to conserve? It is the libertarian principles that America was founded upon & originally followed. That is the Return To Excellence that this blog is named for & is all about.

Thursday, August 27, 2015

A Dangerous Time Of False Hope For Republicans

"Let's tell the truth here – this crop of Democrat candidates is terribly weak.  It's a joke.  It's a complete disaster for the Democrat Party."  - Bobby Jindal - Louisiana Governor & Republican Presidential candidate – from a press release on August 10.
"I'm a yellow dog Democrat." – common statement from Democrats, including many I know, meaning they would vote for a yellow dog before they would vote for a Republican.
After the August 6 FNC Republican primary debates one subscriber wrote "I have a new lineup.  Whoever wins should hire all the candidates" meaning to him they were all impressive compared to the Democrat ideology he detests.  And they were impressive especially when compared to the Republican fields the past several cycles.
Even so this primary debate season is a very dangerous time of false hope & short memory for Republicans – see Bobby Jindal quote above.  The Democrat field in 2012 – namely BO only – was the weakest imaginable because BO had four years in office in which he revealed his socialistic, fascist, ruinous plans he had been implementing to destroy America.  And he won in what Laura Ingraham called for Republicans a "gimmee election."  So we have to be careful with Governor Jindal's appraisal of the Democrat field & understand that @ this point in our history it may not matter who the Democrat nominee for president is.
Please remember that what drives the majority of voters to the polls in the 2016 presidential election will not be about the topics the 17 candidates so ably debated – see below.  It will be about Free Stuff Or Freedom - You Can't Have Them Both as Sarah Palin so eloquently explained on 9/12/12.
We all know the electoral college advantage that Democrats have in that 209 electoral votes of the needed 270 are virtually guaranteed for Democrats & that 54% of the 2012 electorate were women – a repeat of which favors Democrats regardless of their candidate.
In 2012 Mitt received 47% of the popular vote which included 59% of the white vote – which in & of itself should tell you something since Mitt lost by 4.98 million votes (spread out into a 126 electoral vote deficit.)  Complicating matters for Republicans is that the white vote declines about 2% every four years.
Mitt received 27% of the Hispanic vote, 26% of the Asian vote, & 38% of the millennial vote in 2012.  See graphic below of this losing trend as these groups' influence only increases.  It will take a major move up from this performance with these groups for the Republican nominee to even be competitive in the general election. 
The above not only lays out a problem for the Republican party but more importantly a problem for America.  A problem properly or accurately stated is half way solved & the Democrat opponents have not begun to identify the problem portrayed above let alone attempted to solve it. 
For example - the aforementioned FNC top ten tier debate included the topics of pledging support for the Republican nominee or @ least not running as a third party candidate, electability of candidates, the importance of being a governor, do we want another Bush?, women's looks, feeding red divisive meat to the GOP base, NJ's credit rating downgrades, making abortion illegal, banning homosexual marriage, blaming Republicans for the formation of ISIS, expanding Medicaid in Ohio, earned legal status for illegal aliens, & the Mexican government sending criminals, rapists, & drug dealers to America.  All interesting topics (that will build FNC TV ratings) but not ones that when addressed will turn the country around.  The undercard debate did @ least include one 15 minute segment devoted to the economy that gave Carly Fiorina a chance to distinguish herself from the field.
But why not one question about whether the Republican candidates thought BO, & by extension, any of the current Democrat candidates for president have an agenda purposely designed to ingrain a permanent underclass of government dependent people on the citizens of the American republic.  Were the FNC moderators oblivious to what has been happening after six years in plain sight of one anti-American example after another or were they just trying to build ratings for their TV show with provocative questions on mostly irrelevant topics?
Whether asked or not - until Republican candidates start to clearly articulate an eloquent, effective, & persuasive counter to BO's destructive lies, that will certainly be carried forward by the 2016 Democrat nominee, that have been perpetrated on America the last six years – especially the freedoms that are one by one being taken from us every day – Republicans are working @ a disadvantage by campaigning on the enemies' terms discussing every question except the ones that matter.
All of the above minority groups favor Democrats & are dependent on government programs as per BO's purposeful design.  That is the first thing that needs to be addressed clearly & directly – not peripherally.  Republicans may start with a 209 electoral vote deficit & 47% of the population favoring government handouts but that has to change if Republicans expect to win.  A successful candidate must show where this condition has ended before – a democracy moving from the penultimate stage of apathy to dependence to the final stage of dependence back into bondage which are the two stages America teeters on.  BO's immediate goal is to take America to a one party system by obliterating capitalism & he would like to hand pick his successor to carry this goal forward.
Winning the 2016 presidential election for a candidate who will make a difference for America is about how many of the 150 million Americans who live in households that receive some kind of government assistance can comprehend that the government programs they have become dependent upon are not sustainable & whether or not they can dare great enough to help turn this mindset around; whether they can see that the deliberate extinguishment of individual rights & moral principles that America was founded upon will ultimately come home to enslave them unless there is a dramatic change; whether they can come to realize that middle class prosperity & the chance to move to higher standards of living is tied to getting the education & training needed to command employment that will propel the creation of wealth forward in America; or whether they can learn that this is the one brief moment in all of human history, so far, that mankind has had a chance to be free & that they are in jeopardy of throwing this chance away by letting statists take it from them.
Of course finding suitable answers to the above is a long shot because it really depends on finding one person who can reach even some of these 150 million government dependent people to get the mindset going in the opposite direction from "I'm entitled, I deserve, I'm a victim" to one of self responsibility.  The prerequisite of this change in mindset is to show the benefit of laissez-faire capitalism that results from limited government.
But the passive supporters of the status quo are always the majority – these people hope the status quo won't change & they're not motivated enough to do anything about it one way or the other. 
Our fragile future will be determined for the better if one person of tremendous intellectual integrity & decisive action can fight through the media & statist fog & grasp the problem with high efficiency & then lead us out of the morass of lies we have almost succumbed to.  Such a person will return us to the liberty to abundance stage of our history following the libertarian principles the country was founded upon & originally followed.


  1. Doug - I sent this on to my usual gang.

    One thing that ticks me off is the photo: Vote Aqui Here. You must be a US citizen to vote, right? You become a citizen by either birth or by passing the citizenship test. If you have lived here since you were born, you would pick up English by default in 18 years, minimum. If you passed the test (which I hear is not easy), you would have to know English. The test is given ONLY in English. Therefore this sign is encouraging fraudulent voting.

    The radical in me is saying let the Dems win. The economy will almost certainly collapse with any of the Dem candidates. (The past week in the stock market is just a precursor.) Then the John Galts of the country will pick up the pieces and start over. It won't be fun, especially for the 47%, but it has to happen sometime. And soon.

    1. The government does not need to harp on English being the official language of the U.S. - all they have to do is only communicate in English themselves & it will happen. When you see signs like "vote aqui" you know they have another agenda.

      I included the photo to make that point.

  2. Very well written article. Now who would you vote for??

    An unknown person might be a good choice.

    I remember when FDR was running for 4th term, insiders of Democrat party did not want Henry Wallace to be nominated as his VP running mate. They knew FDR was in poor health so they picked an unknown person as his running mate - Harry Truman.

    In 1948 Repub. picked Dewey, who was well known. Outcome of election was not known for several days and Truman won. Maybe an unknown person might be the answer this time??

  3. Perhaps with Trump the American people are allowing themselves to think that we do not have to accept politically correct thinking. I find it hard to believe that in my very middle class neighborhood every household is thrilled about their taxes supporting so many social causes that they don't.

  4. The winner will be one that doesn't talk about how to remove the free stuff (only after elected how to fix it).

    Another winner will not let political correct statements control their campaign.

    To select a winner the moral congregations must give up their tax status, not allow their own greed to make a decision. Only then they can speak to the choir. Their lips are sealed under the tax provisions, also look like hypocrites.

    When things get so bad and satin comes out and says he can fix it the people will vote for him, it, her. Which candidate resembles satin? One that follows BO's thinking, after elected.

    A winner, must bring forth satin's thoughts, (saying: none of your dreams will appear voting for satin)

    Tough talk through a muffled voice will be the winner.

  5. Doug
    Any serious GOP candidate must present this issue repeatedly: that many who receive entitlements strongly tend to vote for Democrats who promise to extend these entitlements – to the peril to the nation and to the person receiving the entitlements.

    Strategies to pursue:

    Install FEAR -- Point out that heavy social welfare states fail. Cite Greece and Puerto Rico. Point out that to a large extent China has financed our welfare state given our exploding debt. Above all present historical and current world scenarios (ex European welfare states) that, left unchecked, will destroy economies to the point where IMF will impose severe restrictions on welfare spending.

    Install optimism:
    The large, increasing Dependency on Government (DG) class is not static. A fair amount of mobility occurs. Some apply themselves and grow out of it and prosper economically. Cite these examples and research specific real ones with real people and ask them to join the presidential campaign. Make clear that more free market economic policies will further present more opportunities for leaving the DG class to higher income and better lifestyle.

    Discuss this repeatedly; challenge all Left attacks immediately with facts.

    Carly – you have a tremendous economic success story. Champion this issue please!

  6. Hi Doug - Absolutely correct. The problem with "republics or democracies" is always the fact that eventually the elitist politicians realize they can guarantee their re-election by buying votes.

    And the U.S. is not immune. "Conservatives" listen to Limbaugh and watch Fox News and think it is a slam dunk. They think: "gee, everyone I know is voting against the Democrats".

    They are fools and so are the fools that make up the Republican Party. As you know I have pointed out endlessly the incompetence of the Republicans to make their message in a populist format that people will listen and follow.

    Besides the fact is that many Republicans don't truly believe their rhetoric, just look at their voting records.

    Put this formula together: democrats are better at buying votes and the republicans stink at public relations = continuous wins for the Democrats.